Wednesday, August 02, 2006

negative, negative, negative

* Tom Ricks was LiveOnline at WaPo.

question:
"Scottsdale, Ariz.: I have not yet read your book. However, just from the titles of your articles, the tone is negative, negative, negative. What has the US and its military done RIGHT..not just tactical activities but strategic decisions and events? In the profession of journalism today, can a journalist be positive and not be viewed by their peers as a cheerleader, or must all critical reviews be critical?"

question:
"Annandale, Va.: The war is not over--yet you label it a fiasco. I didn't read your story and I didn't read your book. But I congratulate you on being the typical cynical, pessimistic, liberal Washington Post reporter that the rest of this country looks down on as somethign wholely un-American and frankly I just can't say enough about morale-destroying you probably are to our troops. I'm glad my WWII-era military father is gone so he wouldn't have to pick up the Post in the morning and see your trash on the front page of the paper. You can report all you want on the nasty stuff of the war but putting "Fiasco in Iraq" only serves denigrate our country and fighting people. You have no response to this. There is no good in that title for your book. I served in the military and we always laughed at the Washington Post and how they were completely out of tune with the rest of the country. Maybe you feel comfortable at 15th and K at the Post headquarters or in some other liberal bastions of this country--but in the rest of the country -- the solid majority of hard-working Americans who believe in freedom. You don't see squat."

question:
Cambridge, Mass.: Many people believe reporters have a liberal bias. Even if that perception is without merit, do you think titling your book "Fiasco," and calling the war an "epic disaster" will make Washington Post readers more or less skeptical about the objectivity of your reporting?

question:
Bethesda, Md.: Have you worked in Iraq? I have to admit I am skeptical about all these Iraq books coming out. Many journalist work a couple months there and then write a book. Do we really have the perspective yet to write about success, failure, etc.?

question:
Corpus Christi, Tex. : Mr. Ricks:

You allege: "I've been struck at how warm and supportive the reaction has been from military officers to my book."

When can we expect you to provide actual evidence of the "warm and supportive ... reaction"? Was Paul Hackett, the self-described "Marine" and darling of the useful idiots of the Washington press corps, the one providing you with all of the "warmth" and "support"?

I got a kick out of seeing Tim Russert just suck down every one of your allegations without asking for any evidence. Of course, if Russert reads some allegation made by the New York Times or Washington Post, he thinks that allegation is "evidence" of what is alleged.

2 comments:

noise said...

I don't blame soldiers for being upset. I wish they would direct some of their anger at the political leadership who IMO made sure the Iraq policy became a fiasco. Nation building, exporting democracy, regime change...by way of cruise missiles, privatization and torture? WTF is that?

I haven't read Ricks book but based on this Q & A he doesn't seem to believe that the Iraq policy was cynical beyond belief.

The mystery of the Iraq campaign is the massive effort of the Establishment to protect the civilian leadership from any accountability. That definitely includes the bizarre '04 Presidential campaign.

When an asshole like Rove doesn't mind lecturing Rep. Murtha about combat...we are in a fucked up place as a country.

lukery said...

you are right, Noise. Ricks still seems like an apologist